Live in Iowa and no I am not a Hawkeye fan (Go Sooners!)

Anyway late in the game they try an onside kick. Iowa recovers the ball but is called for offsides.

On the replay it clearly shows that the Iowa football player has not actually broken the plane AND touched the ground physically with his foot.

Now my question is it offsides if the player breaks the plane of the free kick line with just his body but not touching the ground. I am trying to justify the call as it being the same as player lining up with his head over the line of the scrimmage (breaking the plane) but the rest of his body is okay.

I am doing a poor job of explaining this. Everybody in the sports bar was asking our crew and we all laughed and said it really never came down to that exact of question.

Most of us I will guess will toss the flag when the player actually has stepped across the line and is clearly out ahead of the kicker.

I do not know if it is different in Fed compared to NCAA.

My biggest gripe with the Hawkeye fans or probably any fan was the old "How can you make that call at that point of the game."

My response if it is a foul it is a foul no matter when it occurs.

Any commments appreciated.

NCAA: A player has to be behind the restraining line. There is nothing that says *and be touching the ground beyond* in the rules. Breaking the plane is all that is required.

Deep free kicks rarely will draw a flag when the head/chest are beyond, even a foot across will not usually draw a flag. However, short free kicks, specifically the "on-side" kicks will be tightly scrutinized.

Looked like it should hav ebeen a nocall to me.

Did you make your no-call before or after the replay?

Onside kicks will be called close, but deep ones usually not unless a foot is down. I am an Iowa fan, and still think it was called tight, but properly.

When I saw it live, I didn't see any offsides. Then they said there was a flag down, I was sure it wasn't kicking team offsides. I thought maybe the otherteam was offsides, then when the penalty was announced I was suprised. After seeing the replay I stayed with my initial ruling.

What kind of angle was provided? Down the restraining line would be the only useful one to see.

The camera angle was from R's restraning line, so 10 yards off. You could tell it was VERY close. The only one looking right down the line was the guy who threw the flag.

Well I know the replay angle was not the best to determine whether the call was correct, but I've replayed it quite a few times and the call still bothers me. First, the referee announced the wrong player number on the call. If that was actually the player that the official ruled to be offsides then the call was absolutely incorrect.

Now, the player above him (on your screen) was a tad closer and is where the judgement lies. He possibly had a toe or maybe a foot over the line when it was kicked but this is upon a frame by frame analysis which I know we don't have when we're on the field.

In my opinion with the time remaining, the score, and the fact that Iowa would've still had some work to do to even tie the game...should have been a no call.

The replay showed his right hand over the free kick line/ neutral zone (or whatever it is called in NCAA) prior to the kick.

It was tight but correct.

Imagine the outcry that we'd be hearing had he not called it and the IA went on and won. Getting the foul called is first. Getting the number isn't all that important. Just because the number is wrong doesn't mean a foul didn't happen. Too many people get tied up on what the commentators say. That guy had no clue what offside is. He was so tied up on the players feet being behind the line, when in fact it doesn't have anything to do with the feet. Not a great angle, but it certainly appeared the players head had broken the plane of the restraining line, so a correct call is offside.

Ugh!

Please stay off the field when I'm working. If you're going to make judgements about how hard it might be for the kicking team to score affect your judgement about whether or not to make the call, you have no business on the field.

If he was across the restraining line on an on-sides kick, there's no question it should have been called. Honestly, this is a hard call to get WRONG - you're watching the ball and the line, if at any point you can't see the ball, it's because someone has crossed the line before it was kicked. I'm sure that if he threw the flag, the player was across.

REPLY: I'm at a disadvantage since I didn't see the play, but I will echo what Theisey and MJT have said: On a short kick (especially an onsides kick) call this one tightly. When the kick is deep, be more liberal. Don't allow K an advantage just because he was only a "little" offsides.

Like most of you I've worked the reatraining lines many times. It has to be pretty blatant for me to flag it because, especially in hs, it happens quite a bit. I think the official in the Iowa game was plumbing!

I didn't see the offside live nor did I see it on the replay. Maybe he was a split second over the line, but he was not over enough to justify a flag. I honestly do not beleive that Florida would have argued that a flag wasn't thrown.
When you add the helmet to helmet call from earlier in the game that should not have been called and led to a Gator TD...you have a game where the officials had too much of a hand in deciding the outcome.

Well, here's what the conference super has to say about the call.

http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pb.../SPORTS&lead=1

So what is the rule on thumb on that? I have always been taught dont call an offsides on a kickoff unless the player is ONE FULL STEP over the line. So unless I see his foot on the ground over the line, I usually wont make that call.

What does everyone else look for?

REPLY: I treat the situation like you suggest as long as the kick is deep. If, however, it's an onsides kick attempt, I'll call it very tightly: if K clearly and obviously breaks the plane of his restraining line, I'll flag it.

It think this thread is missing the point of why we are paid the "big bucks" and that is, exercising our judgment as officials. Sure, the call may have been technically correct, however, if are using this argument to defend the call then aren't we ultimately setting ourselves up to be replaced by instant replay which can do a much better job than us to ensure "technically" correct calls are made consistently.

It has already been pointed out that the officials also missed some calls during the game, so how can we hang our hat on being technically correct in one instance when we can't even be consistent on calls throughout one game.

How many times must we take into account the flow of the game, the situation, advantage/disadvantage, etc., when making a call, something instant replay will never be able to do. The officials call on the onside kick occurred at a time in the game and against a player that didn't gain any advantage, that took the game away from the players and into the hands of the officials...or do I dare say, some day, into the hands of instant replay.

How can you know, at the moment of the foul, that a player being across the restraining line, even just a bit, at the moment of the kick during an ONSIDES kick did not gain an advantage. I'd say he most definitely DID gain an advantage not allowed by the rules. On an onsides kick, I (and every crew I work with) will call this as tightly as a scrimmage play.

With high school (NF) we would not even get to this point since offsides / encroachment causes the ball to be dead and we would be hard on our whistle long before anyone recovered the ball.

What does it mean when I hear a "call was tight but correct"? Whatever happened to the phases "fouls must show up on film", "let's not show them how smart we are", "fouls need to jump out at you", and most importantly "have a material effect on the play". If that player was 6" further back would he have less of an opportunity to be part of the play? It's micro-enforcement of a rule. I hate savaging a fellow official, especially one that has a better schedule then I do, but that call went against everything I was ever taught about officiating. I'm a deep wing and face that situation on every kick off-If it's that close I would never, ever make that call. Sorry to be a Monday Morning QB but I can't support that foul.

I know some are saying it shouldn't have been called since it was tight (but correct) and at that junction of the game. For that matter that kick could have been recovered by the very kid that was offside. The receivers may have seen how fast this kid was and paniced that he was that quick and lost focus on the kick. I admit this was a bang bang play but sometimes that's the difference in the recovery. Perhaps another scenario is the receivers may commit a foul during the kick and the kicking team recovers. What should now be an offsetting situation with a re-kick is now a recovery by the kicking team. They've been cheated out of a re-kick because we didn't flag the offside because it was tight. This very call has been ignored before in the past and you should know that the outcry was much worse than what it is now with them calling that foul.